Discussion in 'News' started by Cristian_25H, Nov 15, 2012.
isn't this anamorphic widescreen?
I see myself using a monitor like this for work, but I can't imagine gaming on it.
It's a nice looking monitor though impractical for everyday use, I once bought a really widescreen 15" monitor when LCD's where still a new technology and part from looking good it didn't really serve a fit purpose. They need to up the verticle pixels though then it would be just an 2560x1440 monitor unless they also increased the horizontal to keep the wide aspect and at £500+ it's priced itself out of it's target audience IMO
What resolution was that? 1080y is not perfect but it's pretty decent. This is (almost) like two monitors, but in one. And I'd say a LOT of people use two 1080p monitors for all kinds of things.
this was 6+ years ago, I can't off the top of my head remember the exact resolution though it was "wider" than widescreen monitors today (possibly anamorphic??). Also this is no where close to 2 1080p monitors if anything it will just give you more free space on each side, they need more Y pixels IMO and if they did that it would likely be a 2560x1440 monitor, seems a bit gimmicky especially for the cost when you can get a number of 1440p monitors for that cost of it. If it was £250-£300 it would be a winner in my book.
It is a bit off but it serves the same purpose: Stuff lined up next to each other.
Whilst you're not wrong, you can still do this on a 1920x1080p monitor and for £/$600 it's really overpriced, like I said if it was £300 it would be a damn nice monitor for the price though at £600 it's very hard to justify when you can get a 27" 1440p monitor for the same cost. I do like the monitor though, just shame about the price.
Perfect size to celebrate 40th annivesary of Burt Reynolds Cosmo centerfold.
Example, here's a SS of a webpage and a PDF opened side by side running at 1080p, as you can see the horizontal is plenty for 2 fullscreen documents however to see the PDF in full without resorting to reducing the size you need to increase the verticle pixels, the same will happen on this monitor only you will have more free space effectively doing noting on the 2560x1080 monitor, why spend £400 more than a standard 1080p monitor? if anything it's appeal will be limited to specialist applications that can make use of the extra horizontal pixels but even then a 1440p can be had for less which makes it a moot point.
No, you can put up a third thing there.
That's a 2nd monitor, see edit, the 2 docs occupy one 1080p screen and again the width isn't the issue, it's the verticle which doesn't have enough pixels to display the whole document length, the same would happen on this monitor only you would have more free space on the sides.
Disabled my 2nd monitor now so this is a standard 1080p SS, this monitor still wouldn't give you any benefit over 1080p as the extra horizontal pixels are wasted, you need more vertical to display full length documents.
I don't know what at the hate is about here, wide=awesome, like having dual screens but without all the problems that brings. Too bad they don't do a cheaper one without the audio, usb and display port things no-one ever uses.
Well done, you obviously didn't read my posts, you can acheive this "wideness" on a standard 1920x1080 screen, the limiting factor in both monitors is the 1080 vertical pixels, but kudos to you if you like having black/white bars down the sides of your monitors and paying $400 for the pleasure.
Plenty? Looks like the web page is chopped off on the right hand side, and both the PDF and the web page have a horizontal scroll bar... though, you arent missing anything in the PDF. "PLenty", to me, means there is more than enough, when its quite obvious there barely isnt enough.
It has a nice look to it.
HA!!!!!!!! My uncles new Ipad does better then that
To the people looking for vertical pixels:
Turn the monitor on it's side. Now you have 2560 pixels of vertical awesomeness!
People are generally looking for a good balance. If you would turn this monitor I think it would be too high.
Separate names with a comma.